On 18/12/2023 21:43, Java Jive wrote:
> Your memory is muddled, it was face-masks, not PPE:

Face-masks are a type of PPE.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

On 19/12/2023 17:10, Java Jive wrote:
> On 19/12/2023 15:43, JMB99 wrote:
>>
>> On 19/12/2023 14:14, Davey wrote:
>>>
>>> I still do not know what was actually wrong with the PPE supplied by
>>> Medpro.
>
> That's because you seem determined to ignore anything that you've
> already been told about the case that doesn't fit your bigoted
> preconceptions:
>
> On 18/12/2023 17:01, Java Jive wrote:
> >
> > Allegedly according to the legal documents, they weren't even sterile,
> > rather a basic failure if true,

Did the face masks need to be sterile? Throughout the corona Virus
lock-down the masks given to people entering hospitals were dispensed
from open boxes where the masks were packed in batches of 50(ish). There
was no restriction at the hospitals on the type of mask that were
sourced on a personal basis.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In article <ulsr6h$61uk$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 19/12/2023 18:56, Bob Latham wrote:
> > In article <ulsofe$5jfr$1@dont-email.me>,
> > Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 19/12/2023 18:16, Bob Latham wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In article <ulsiq9$4jit$1@dont-email.me>,
> >>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> > If seeing the Guardian for the rubbish lefty rag it is makes me
> > any of those things, I'm a happy man. Thanks.

> Your problem is that it's not a lefty rag, but a centrist
> newspaper,

Hang on, just fell off my chair laughing. How far left do you need to
be, to see the Guardian as centrist?

> and your thinking of it as a lefty rag merely reveals
> more about your own hopeless bigotry

Yes !!! Got called a bigot by JJ. Thank you so much, confirms I'm on
the straight and narrow. From most people it would be an insult, from
you it's a complement. Thanks.

> than it reveals anything about the newspaper.

You mean the rag that the truth teller Cadwalladr writes for? Remind
me again what did the judge decide on costs etc. how much did she
have to pay? Lets see how good your leftist spin on that episode of
truth telling is.

Or that pillar of common sense Monbiot?

The home of stupidity where common sense and the truth goes to die.

I'm done. Can't argue with hate filled, foul-mouthed lefties, no
point.

Bob.

On 20/12/2023 09:58, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <ulsr6h$61uk$1@dont-email.me>,
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 19/12/2023 18:56, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> In article <ulsofe$5jfr$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 19/12/2023 18:16, Bob Latham wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In article <ulsiq9$4jit$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> If seeing the Guardian for the rubbish lefty rag it is makes me
>>> any of those things, I'm a happy man. Thanks.
>
>> Your problem is that it's not a lefty rag, but a centrist
>> newspaper,
>
> Hang on, just fell off my chair laughing. How far left do you need to
> be, to see the Guardian as centrist?

You need only to be centrist - your problem is that I don't subscribe
to any particular political dogma, I follow facts and hard information,
so cannot fairly be described as left-wing: I'm right-wing on a few
issues, centrist on most, left-wing on a few issues. You by contrast
are right-wing on everything, and follow every right-wing meme now
matter how obviously fake it is.

>> and your thinking of it as a lefty rag merely reveals
>> more about your own hopeless bigotry
>
> Yes !!! Got called a bigot by JJ. Thank you so much, confirms I'm on
> the straight and narrow. From most people it would be an insult, from
> you it's a complement. Thanks.

Again, childish idiocy: only a few posts ago you were saying that you
were tending to agree with me on the issue of the thread, but still
couldn't resist wasting everyone's time with a playground argument.

>> than it reveals anything about the newspaper.
>
> You mean the rag that the truth teller Cadwalladr writes for? Remind
> me again what did the judge decide on costs etc. how much did she
> have to pay? Lets see how good your leftist spin on that episode of
> truth telling is.

One mistake, but otherwise a very successful career, and nothing
particularly left-wing there:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carole_Cadwalladr

"Journalism awards

British Journalism Awards' Technology Journalism Award in December
2017[35][36]
Specialist Journalist of the Year 2017 at the National Society of
Editors Press Awards[37][38]
Orwell Prize for Political Journalism in June 2018 (for her work
"on the impact of big data on the EU Referendum and the 2016 US
presidential election").[39]
Reporters without Borders "L'esprit de RSF" award in November 2018
(for her work on subversion of democratic processes).[40]
The 2018 Polk Award for National Reporting with reporters from the
New York Times.[41]
The 2018 Stieg Larsson Prize, an annual award of 200,000 krona for
people working in Stieg Larsson's spirit[42]
Political Studies Association Journalist of the Year in November
2018 (joint award with Amelia Gentleman) for her persistence and
resilience in pursuing "investigative journalism on subjects such as
personal data".[43]
Two 2018 British Journalism Awards for Technology reporting and
Investigation[44]
Technology journalist of the year in the 2018 Society of Editors
awards[45]
The 2019 Gerald Loeb Award for Investigative Reporting[46][47]
The annual Hay Festival's Medal for Journalism in May 2019, "for
the heroic and rigorous investigative journalism".[48]
Finalist, 2019 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, alongside The
New York Times reporters, for her coverage of the Cambridge Analytica
scandal.[49]
Winner, 2023 Quaker Truth & Integrity Award[50]"

> Or that pillar of common sense Monbiot?

Nothing particularly left-wing there, either ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

"Published works

Monbiot's first book was Poisoned Arrows (1989), concerning the
partially World Bank-funded transmigration program on the peoples and
tribes of West Papua. It was followed by Amazon Watershed (1991), which
documents the expulsions of Brazilian peasant farmers from their land.
His third book, No Man's Land: An Investigative Journey Through Kenya
and Tanzania (1994), documented the seizure of land and cattle from
nomadic people in Kenya and the Tanzania.

In 2000, he published Captive State: The Corporate Takeover of Britain
in which Monbiot argues that corporate power in the United Kingdom is a
serious threat to democracy. His fifth book, The Age of Consent: A
Manifesto for a New World Order, was published in 2003. The book is an
attempt to set out a positive manifesto for change for the global
justice movement.[66]

Monbiot's next book, Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning, published in
2006, focused on the issue of climate change. Feral: Searching for
Enchantment on the Frontiers of Rewilding was published in 2013, and
focuses on the concept of rewilding the planet. In the book, Monbiot
criticises sheep farming.[67] The book received favourable reviews in
The Spectator[68] and The Daily Telegraph.[67] It won the Society of
Biology Book Award for general biology in 2014.[69] Monbiot's 2022 book
Regenesis focuses on the environmental impact of agriculture and
sustainable approaches.[70]

[...]

Awards

In 1995, Nelson Mandela presented him with a United Nations Global 500
Award for outstanding environmental achievement.[78] He won the Sir
Peter Kent award 1991 prize for his book Amazon Watershed. In November
2007, his book Heat was awarded the Premio Mazotti, an Italian book
prize, but he was denied the money given with the prize because he chose
not to travel to Venice to collect it in person, arguing that it was not
a good enough reason to justify flying. In 2017, he was a recipient of
the SEAL Environmental Journalism Award for his work at The Guardian.[79]

In 2022, Monbiot was awarded The Orwell Prize for Journalism.[80]"

> The home of stupidity where common sense and the truth goes to die.
>
> I'm done. Can't argue with hate filled, foul-mouthed lefties, no
> point.

So fuck off, childish loser.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 20/12/2023 09:57, alan_m wrote:
> On 19/12/2023 17:10, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 19/12/2023 15:43, JMB99 wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/12/2023 14:14, Davey wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I still do not know what was actually wrong with the PPE supplied by
>>>> Medpro.
>>
>> That's because you seem determined to ignore anything that you've
>> already been told about the case that doesn't fit your bigoted
>> preconceptions:
>>
>> On 18/12/2023 17:01, Java Jive wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Allegedly according to the legal documents, they weren't even sterile,
>>  > rather a basic failure if true,
>
> Did the face masks need to be sterile?  Throughout the corona Virus
> lock-down the masks given to people entering hospitals were dispensed
> from open boxes where the masks were packed in batches of 50(ish). There
> was no restriction at the hospitals on the type of mask that were
> sourced on a personal basis.

Again, someone who hasn't bothered to read information linked before
posting, despite that information being linked in the thread twice now,
and worse still has excluded it from the quoting in an apparent attempt
to bury it, so here it is again:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/04/ppe-medpro-uk-government-alleges-firm-supplied-defective-gowns-nhs

It was the second order for gowns that is the subject of the legal
action by the UK Government, one of the grounds for the legal action
being that they weren't sterile.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 20/12/2023 09:57, alan_m wrote:
>
> Did the face masks need to be sterile?  Throughout the corona Virus
> lock-down the masks given to people entering hospitals were dispensed
> from open boxes where the masks were packed in batches of 50(ish). There
> was no restriction at the hospitals on the type of mask that were
> sourced on a personal basis.

I had to go to outpatients several times early in Lockdown. There was a
nurse at the door checking who you were but can't remember now whether
she handed out masks, I think she might have but can't sure. I usually
had one in my pocket so hardly sterile!

On 20/12/2023 09:58, Bob Latham wrote:
> Hang on, just fell off my chair laughing. How far left do you need to
> be, to see the Guardian as centrist?

Some people even believe what they read in the Guardian!

Don't forget at the time of Levenson, they also got caught hacking but
claimed it was OK when they did it.

On Wednesday 20 December 2023 at 09:57:33 UTC, alan_m wrote:
> On 19/12/2023 17:10, Java Jive wrote:
> > On 19/12/2023 15:43, JMB99 wrote:
> >>
> >> On 19/12/2023 14:14, Davey wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I still do not know what was actually wrong with the PPE supplied by
> >>> Medpro.
> >
> > That's because you seem determined to ignore anything that you've
> > already been told about the case that doesn't fit your bigoted
> > preconceptions:
> >
> > On 18/12/2023 17:01, Java Jive wrote:
> > >
> > > Allegedly according to the legal documents, they weren't even sterile,
> > > rather a basic failure if true,
> Did the face masks need to be sterile? Throughout the corona Virus
> lock-down the masks given to people entering hospitals were dispensed
> from open boxes where the masks were packed in batches of 50(ish). There
> was no restriction at the hospitals on the type of mask that were
> sourced on a personal basis.
>

The ones for medical staff needed to be rather more effective.

>
>
> --
> mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 20/12/2023 10:45, JMB99 wrote:
>
> Some people even believe what they read in the Guardian!

Those who don't are certainly very ill-advised, and probably very
biased. No newspaper or other media ever gets it right 100% of the
time, but The Guardian, The Independent, & the BBC are better than most
others.

> Don't forget at the time of Levenson, they also got caught hacking but
> claimed it was OK when they did it.

'They', iow The Guardian, didn't 'get caught'; an individual Guardian
journalist David Leigh freely admitted to a single case of listening to
the voicemails of a corrupt arms-dealer who had inadvertently left his
PIN on a public document, which he thought was perfectly ethical on
public interest grounds:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/dec/04/mondaymediasection

"I've used some of those questionable methods myself over the years. I,
too, once listened to the mobile phone messages of a corrupt arms
company executive - the crime similar to that for which Goodman now
faces the prospect of jail. The trick was a simple one: the businessman
in question had inadvertently left his pin code on a print-out and all
that was needed was to dial straight into his voicemail.

There is certainly a voyeuristic thrill in hearing another person's
private messages. But unlike Goodman, I was not interested in witless
tittle-tattle about the royal family. I was looking for evidence of
bribery and corruption. And unlike the News of the World, I was not
paying a private detective to routinely help me with
circulation-boosting snippets. That is my defence, when I try to explain
newspaper methods to my current university journalism students, and some
of whom are rather shocked. There are other techniques I have used,
along with the rest of Fleet Street. I did not turn up my nose when the
notorious Benjy the Binman emptied a bag of stinking rubbish on to my
carpet. He wanted to show me incriminating statements about Saudi arms
deals, which a City law firm had been too idle to shred before putting
out on the street for collection. I read the information with interest.
I did, however, refuse to pick up the other gossipy documents about
celebrities that Benjy was also peddling. And when he wanted large
amounts of cash for copies of those documents he had that were rather
more in the public interest, I sent him off to the Sunday Times."

The same reporter repeated this story in his evidence to the Leveson
Inquiry:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/blog/2011/dec/06/leveson-inquiry-leigh-atkins-harris-live

More widely however, The Guardian can take a great deal of credit for
the Leveson Inquiry ever taking place. Search the following for 'guardian':

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/270939/0780_i.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/270941/0780_ii.pdf

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

In article <382da3e7-4309-462e-9483-1cfde894c35dn@googlegroups.com>, R.
Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 December 2023 at 09:57:33 UTC, alan_m wrote:
> > On 19/12/2023 17:10, Java Jive wrote:
> > > On 19/12/2023 15:43, JMB99 wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 19/12/2023 14:14, Davey wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I still do not know what was actually wrong with the PPE supplied
> > >>> by Medpro.
> > >
> > > That's because you seem determined to ignore anything that you've
> > > already been told about the case that doesn't fit your bigoted
> > > preconceptions:
> > >
> > > On 18/12/2023 17:01, Java Jive wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Allegedly according to the legal documents, they weren't even
> > > > sterile, rather a basic failure if true,
> > Did the face masks need to be sterile? Throughout the corona Virus
> > lock-down the masks given to people entering hospitals were dispensed
> > from open boxes where the masks were packed in batches of 50(ish).
> > There was no restriction at the hospitals on the type of mask that
> > were sourced on a personal basis.
> >

> The ones for medical staff needed to be rather more effective.

to continue the mask theme: the daughter & son-in-law of a friend are both
hospital doctors. At the start of Covid, they were issued with one mask =
to be shared between them.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 20/12/2023 in message <ulv3qo$kc25$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:

>>Some people even believe what they read in the Guardian!
>
>Those who don't are certainly very ill-advised, and probably very biased.
>No newspaper or other media ever gets it right 100% of the time, but The
>Guardian, The Independent, & the BBC are better than most others.

Wow, the three most left wing and biased sources of news in existence.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF
if you can read this, you're a nerd 10.

On 20/12/2023 22:33, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 20/12/2023 in message <ulv3qo$kc25$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> No newspaper or other media ever gets it right 100% of the
>> time, but The Guardian, The Independent, & the BBC are better than
>> most others.
>
> Wow, the three most left wing and biased sources of news in existence.

Says a well-known right-wing pigot (= parrot-bigot); you really do need
to learn to see yourself as others see you. Do you *REALLY* claim that
that they are more left wing than the Daily Mirror, Socialist Worker,
etc, etc?

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45744-which-media-outlets-do-britons-trust-2023?redirect_from=%2Ftopics%2Fpolitics%2Farticles-reports%2F2023%2F05%2F25%2Fwhich-media-outlets-do-britons-trust-2023

The three sources I've named come out top or nearly so, depending on
exactly how you measure it. Other mainstream TV channels come out well,
but notably, wrt to newspapers, even i does better than The Telegraph,
given the latter's appalling coverage of the pandemic and climate
change, no-one should be surprised.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Sunday 17 December 2023 at 17:53:12 UTC, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> Is there a TV available that will automatically tune to another station
> when that cow Laura Kuenssberg comes on? I don't mind paying for it as if
> she carries on like she is at the moment I will have to brick the TV anyway.
>
> --
> Jeff Gaines Dorset UK

All you need is a TV permanently tuned to GB News, with possibly an option for Fox News if you want to catch up on Trump's latest pronouncements.

In article <c3b7610b-e21d-4191-9c26-3dd5c34bf2d5n@googlegroups.com>,
R. Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:

> All you need is a TV permanently tuned to GB News,

Not a bad idea but then I'd miss "Plank Of The Week" on Talk TV
7.00pm Fridays. Usually some sensible people on there.

Bob.

On 17 Dec 2023 19:05:02 GMT
"Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:

> On 17/12/2023 in message <ulnfc0$32jlm$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>
> >On 17/12/2023 18:05, Davey wrote:
> >>
> >>On 17 Dec 2023 17:53:09 GMT
> >>"Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Is there a TV available that will automatically tune to another
> >>>station when that cow Laura Kuenssberg comes on? I don't mind paying
> >>>for it as if she carries on like she is at the moment I will have to
> >>>brick the TV anyway.
> >
> >FFS, grow up.
> >
> >>I normally don't like her, and today made no difference to my feeling.
> >>She had clearly made up her mind about Baroness Mone before the
> >>interview started, and was not going to be diverted from that.
> >
> >Didn't see the interview, but Baroness Mone is just another snout in the
> >trough, and deserves pretty much anything that comes her way.
>
> Not true if you actually consider the facts, which Kuenssberg clearly
> didn't.
I watched the programme and although I didn't any preconceived ideas, I too disliked Ms Kuenssberg's approach. It left all querstions unanswered except that Baroness confessed to lying to the press.

But what about the facts?

1) Under UK tax law, if a set of steps are piut in place, the sole or main purpose of which is the avoidance of tax, the authorities can look through them as if they are transparent.
Does that apply here?

2) Under the sale of goods legislation, the product must be match the sample.
Was there a sample? Was it tested to see that it was up to the requirenents and if not which moron authorised the purchase? Should they remain in the same position?

3) Did the baroness know that the PPE was not up the spec required?
4) If not, what right did she have to offer it as such.

Nice looking woman though, I must admit.

Thats my two penuth.

--
Linux Mint 21.1 kernel version 5.15.0-91-generic Cinnamon 5.6.8
AMD Phenom II x4 955 CPU 16Gb Dram 2TB Barracuda

On 19/12/2023 17:10, Java Jive wrote:
>
> On 19/12/2023 15:43, JMB99 wrote:
>>
>> On 19/12/2023 14:14, Davey wrote:
>>>
>>> And I still do not know how Medpro's 30% profit margin compares with
>>> other suppliers' profit margins. If it is the same, or even less that
>>> others', then a major plank of this action against it is nullified.
>
> FFS!  You are either terminally naive or extremely politically biased  -
>  the fact that there is *ANY* profit margin at all, let alone one as
> high as 30%, is exactly what nullifies their hypocritical claim in the
> interview that in watching TV footage at the start of the pandemic they
> felt inspired to 'help'.  Think about BandAid & LiveAid  -  someone
> whose prime motivation is a desire to help does something at cost, or
> even donates funds to a cause, they don't take a 30% profit and then
> squirrel away the resulting £61m (before tax, it should be said) in a
> family trust based in a tax haven!
>
>> The attacks seem to be mainly from Labour who prefer attacking the
>> government to actually devising policies and also think all profit is
>> wrong (unless by a Labour crony!).
>
> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for this opinion stated as if it were a fact?

Those who continue to struggle to believe, against all the evidence
covered in this thread, that the couple are no more than just another
two particularly gluttonous snouts in the trough, may care to read the
following, which shows that they have been gorging themselves at
others', including HMRC's, expense since well before the PPE Medpro scandal:

Michelle Mone’s husband linked to tax firms whose clients submitted
misleading claims, documents suggest
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/18/michelle-mone-husband-douglas-barrowman

Much too much to quote individually, read all of it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk